Legal Opinion
Fraser v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided April 9, 1928No. 232PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtL. Hand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The record does not contain any findings by which the original cost can be ascertained of the 50 feet which remained after the sale of 1909, nor of the proper allocation of the expenses before that time. For this reason the respondent insists that the point is not before us. However, it is plain from the action of the board that their decision hinged upon the question now mooted, and before that tribunal the respondent conceded it to be relevant. Having led the appellant to suppose that the record was sufficient, the respondent raises the defect with scant…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Purity Extract & Tonic Co. v. LynchSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Lynch v. HornbySupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- United States v. FlannerySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Jacob Ruppert v. CaffeySupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- McCaughn v. LudingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Miriam Sakol v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Lawrence J. Alves and Myra L. Alves v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Central Real Estate Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1931
- King Amusement Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Oswego & S. R. Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.